BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 685
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 685 (Eng)
As Amended May 27, 2011
Majority vote
WATER, PARKS & WILDLIFE 8-3
APPROPRIATIONS 12-5
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Huffman, Blumenfield, |Ayes:|Fuentes, Blumenfield, |
| |Campos, Fong, Gatto, | |Bradford, Charles |
| |Roger Hernández, Hueso, | |Calderon, Campos, Davis, |
| |Yamada | |Gatto, Hall, Hill, Lara, |
| | | |Mitchell, Solorio |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Halderman, Bill |Nays:|Harkey, Donnelly, |
| |Berryhill, Jones | |Nielsen, Norby, Wagner |
| | | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Declares a state policy on the human right to water.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Declares that it is state policy that every human being has
the right to clean, affordable, and accessible water for human
consumption, cooking, and sanitary purposes that is adequate
for the health and well-being of the individual and family.
2)Requires relevant state agencies, including the Department of
Water Resources, the
State Water Resources Control Board and the State Department of
Public Health, consider the state policy on the human right to
water when revising, adopting, or establishing policies,
regulations, and grant criteria.
3)Does not expand any state obligation to provide water or
require the expenditure of additional resources to develop
water infrastructure beyond the obligations that may exist
pursuant to the requirements for the relevant state agencies
outlined above.
4)Specifies that the state policy applies to water for
AB 685
Page 2
individuals and not for new development.
5)Prohibits implementation of the state policy from infringing
on the rights or responsibilities of any public water system.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Prioritizes the use of water for domestic purposes, which
includes water for human sustenance, household conveniences,
and domestic or barnyard animals, as the highest use of water,
and the next highest use is irrigation.
2)Finds and declares that every citizen of California has the
right to pure and safe drinking water.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, possible costs of an unknown amount, ranging from
negligible to possibly significant amounts, to implement the
provisions of this bill, depending upon how it is interpreted by
implementing agencies.
COMMENTS : In 1913, California adopted its current water rights
system. This enactment included the policy that was later
codified as Water Code Section 106, which declares that the use
of water for domestic purposes is the highest use of water. In
1989, the Legislature passed and the Governor signed AB 21
(Sher) Chapter 823, Statutes of 1989. Among other things, that
bill established in Health and Safety Code Section 116270 a
legislative finding and declaration that every citizen of
California has the right to pure and safe drinking water.
This bill supplements the existing general domestic preference
policy and AB 21 (Sher) by declaring that every human being has
a right to water for certain needs related to human health and
well-being and calls upon state agencies to recognize that right
in their policies and programs. The bill explicitly limits the
right to humans and excludes new developments. It also includes
a savings clause that ensures that local and regional agencies
retain their rights and responsibilities. This bill is similar
to AB 1242 (Ruskin), which was passed by both the Assembly and
the Senate in 2009, before being vetoed by Governor
Schwarzenegger.
Supporters of the bill emphasize that access to safe and
AB 685
Page 3
affordable water is a fundamental human right essential to our
health, the environment and the economy. They state groundwater
pollution occurs from various sources, including nitrates,
pesticides, industrial chemicals, and some naturally occurring
chemicals in high concentrations, and that such contamination
has resulted in limited clean water supplies for a number of
communities, especially those which are smaller, rural and poor.
Supporters state that citizens in those communities, at best,
pay more for their water to fund expensive treatment and, at
worst, end up without safe drinking water because they cannot
afford treatment and have no alternative supply. Supporters
state this bill will move California forward to a day when every
citizen can safely fill a glass of water from their tap and
drink it without becoming sick.
Opponents of the bill argue that it could lead to higher water
bills for water service customers, and may have other unintended
consequences. Opponents argue that this bill would establish a
requirement that water agencies provide water service regardless
of affordability or that this bill may have the effect of
preventing water suppliers from cutting off service to customers
who fail to pay their bills. Additionally, some opponents of
this bill argue that by establishing a potentially enforceable
human right to water, this bill has uncertain legal implications
which may result in litigation.
Amendments to this bill were adopted in Assembly Appropriations
Committee to delete the mandatory requirement that state
agencies employ all reasonable means to implement the policy.
Instead, this bill now requires that state agencies consider the
policy when developing and adopting regulations, rules, policies
and other actions.
Analysis Prepared by : Tina Cannon Leahy / W., P. & W. / (916)
319-2096
FN: 0001057